Tommy Kelly scorches Patriots

FredFromDartmouth said:

The Patriots have 10-15 million in cap space and have serious problems at DL and especially at WR, partially because of their economizing. The Patriots are cheap; everyone in the league knows it . Brady knows it; I am sure this contributes to his poor attitude and grousing.

Brady has no one to stretch the field because that Patriots cheaped out in the offseason. They could have had Sanders or Smith (and Welker last year), but they were too obsessed with saving money. So now they have 10-15 mil and no one to spend it on.

Click to expand...

That's all not correct.

We have money that we will carry over that can be used to extend key players (e.g. McC and Revis). No reason to spend it every year to the fullest. Now if you would not be able to carry any over, then this would be a different discussion.

Also, generally we pay for performance. If you perform your job well, you are paid well. As soon as your level of play doesn't justify the pay, you will either be asked to restructure or be traded/cut. And there is nothing wrong with that. There is a salary cap and a cap on the roster size.

They valued Sanders at a specific price and decided to move on. You don't know what role Sanders would have played here so comparing it to his performance in Denver is pointless. Steve Smith had NE as his next stop, but never got out of Baltimore, so this is an even less useful example.

And, finally, there will be football played after Tom Brady retires and it is the job of this organization to not just fold after that. It is not their job to cater to his every whim. We are not the Tom Brady Football team but the New England Patriots.

luuked said:

Steve Smith had NE as his next stop, but never got out of Baltimore, so this is an even less useful example.

Click to expand...

Not to mention Steve Smith has said that Belichick called him before he even left to visit Baltimore and was very interested. One could assume Bill was doing his best to get Smith to come to Foxboro before Baltimore.

Ultimately Smith's decision probably came down to the fact that Baltimore was playing Carolina.

luuked said:

They valued Sanders at a specific price and decided to move on.

Click to expand...

And if one is to believe Loyko, they also had injury concerns with him. If those concerns existed a year and a half ago (as opposed to popping up over the 2013 season), then it'd make complete sense why they offered him a one year contract as and RFA but not a multi year deal as either an RFA or UFA. My guess is that's the case, as they did have him in for a physical in 2013, but not as far as I can tell in 2014.

-Pats asked him to redo his deal in March, he agreed to. He could have said no then and left.
-Plays 3 preseason games and plays starter snaps while coming back from an ACL injury and decides 2 weeks before the season that he didn't want to be in a rotation because that would affect his potential earnings, so he forces his way out
-Signs with Arizona for $955k which means he is definitely making less than what he would have in NE this season
-Has played 65% of the snaps through 3 weeks, which indicates he is in a rotation. Judging by NE's DL play and injuries one might assume Kelly would be right around that number. 60% was his max out on percentage played incentives which would have paid him $645k, in addition to $800k for being on the active-46 for 16 games and his $955k base salary


I just don't get how the Pats are the one's wrong here. You want to argue about them asking him to redo his deal, I will argue he was 33 years old coming back from an ACL injury,

This was how his contract was structured like for 2014 before the restructure

Base salary: $1.95 million
Workout bonus: $50,000
Roster bonus: $31,250 per game that Kelly is active (maximum value of $500,000)
$2.5m

Here is his restructure

Signing bonus: $100,000
Base salary: $955,000
Roster bonuses: $800,000 ($50K per game he's on the 46-man active list)
$1.85m Just for being active 16 games and not playing any snaps

+Playing-time incentives:
20 percent -- $95,000 ($1.94m)
30 percent -- $195,000 ($2.04m)
40 percent -- $345,000 ($2.19m)
50 percent -- $495,000 ($2.34m)
60 percent -- $645,000 ($2.49m)

So with being active and playing he could have made up to -$2.49m

A whooping $5000 less than what his deal was before the restructure.


He's making $955k in Arizona and has played 65% of the snaps. Being healthy and active for 16 games and playing no snaps at all for NE he could have made almost double that.

But yep Pats are cheap blah blah blah.

captain stone said:

Kelly = right

Bill = wrong, again.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. It takes a special kind of cluelessness to argue otherwise.

Deus Irae said:

Absolutely. It takes a special kind of cluelessness to argue otherwise.

Click to expand...

Player didn't want to be here, what was he suppose to do keep him and have another Adalius Thomas situation on his hands?

Joel Corry just confirmed that Kelly's deal with the Cardinals is simply salary

borg said:

[QUOTE="RayClay, post: 3926237, member: 4252"


I hope some reporter has the balls to bring that up with him. He's looking pretty stupid here if he thinks he made a wise money decision.

Click to expand...

More fun for reporters to flame with the "cheap" angle. Opportunities have been few over the years, so you jump on what you can and ride it until the next opportunity presents itself. That my friends is" ESPN Reporting 101".....a money maker every time
The "Pats Falling Apart" will be a week long saga on the mothership...prepare[/QUOTE]
Until the Patriots win. I really hope they beat the bungles this weekend if only to shut the sky is (has) falling (fallen) types up.

I don't care why Tommy Kelly's gone. The bottom line is that the Patriots are a much weaker team without him. I've watched the Arizona games and say with all confidence that he would be the BEST DT on that team (unless and until Wilfork continues to come back form his injury - Kelly didn't have an Achilles, but an ACL, which is easier for rehab) by a WIDE MARGIN.

It's really that simple.

I don't see how Kelly is the right one here. He left for less money. He should have told the Pats he wasn't taking a paycut back in March it's his own fault he just looks like a dumbass.

JMC00 said:

Player didn't want to be here, what was he suppose to do keep him and have another Adalius Thomas situation on his hands?

Click to expand...

He was supposed to avoid a situation where his #2 interior lineman wanted to leave. This isn't rocket science. Here, post this on your wall...

Bad ideas:

1.) Forcing a needed player to restructure his deal to one based upon playing time, and then cutting his playing time for reasons other than level of play.


There have been plenty of other things done this year that you can add to that list, but you can start with that one. Perhaps you can put a note at the bottom that says something like

"Always remember that football players are human beings, with human emotions."

Froob said:

I don't see how Kelly is the right one here. He left for less money. He should have told the Pats he wasn't taking a paycut back in March it's his own fault he just looks like a dumbass.

Click to expand...

It does not matter if he was dumb or not, the Patriots desperately need him and they lost him by trying the usual, obnoxious Patriots salary chiseling. The is why they lost Welker. I am sure they tried to lo-ball Sanders and Smith. Any one of these 4 guys would have made a huge different on Monday night. Brady has no deep threat so the defense crowds the line and the Patriots cannot stop the run.

I don't blame Welker and Kelly; I would have said screw you to the Patriots if they tried that crap with me.

The Patriots are now harvesting all the ill-will and business decisions they sowed.

FredFromDartmouth said:

It does not matter if he was dumb or not, the Patriots desperately need him and they lost him by trying the usual, obnoxious Patriots salary chiseling. The is why they lost Welker. I am sure they tried to lo-ball Sanders and Smith. Any one of these 4 guys would have made a huge different on Monday night. Brady has no deep threat so the defense crowds the line and the Patriots cannot stop the run.

I don't blame Welker and Kelly; I would have said screw you to the Patriots if they tried that crap with me.

The Patriots are now harvesting all the ill-will and business decisions they sowed.

Click to expand...

Are you under the impression that repeating yourself enough times while ignoring the inaccuracies that have been pointed out is going to make you right?

Deus Irae said:

He was supposed to avoid a situation where his #2 interior lineman wanted to leave. This isn't rocket science. Here, post this on your wall...

Bad ideas:

1.) Forcing a needed player to restructure his deal to one based upon playing time, and then cutting his playing time for reasons other than level of play.

Click to expand...

It's not like they held a gun to his head and said sign this deal. He had an option to decline and force the Pats hand to either keep him at his current deal or release him. He agreed to the deal.

This whole stupid ass idea that his playing time was cut is based on what?? Him making the assumption that because he was playing x amount of snaps in the preseason coming back from a torn ACL? That's the only way he came to that conclusion because Belichick doesn't guarantee anyone other than Brady how much playing time they are going get especially interior DL.

FredFromDartmouth said:

It does not matter if he was dumb or not, the Patriots desperately need him and they lost him by trying the usual, obnoxious Patriots salary chiseling. The is why they lost Welker. I am sure they tried to lo-ball Sanders and Smith. Any one of these 4 guys would have made a huge different on Monday night. Brady has no deep threat so the defense crowds the line and the Patriots cannot stop the run.

I don't blame Welker and Kelly; I would have said screw you to the Patriots if they tried that crap with me.

The Patriots are now harvesting all the ill-will and business decisions they sowed.

Click to expand...

The Patriots did him a solid even releasing him in the first place. They could have told him tough either play here or retire. There's no evidence they even low balled Steve Smith. That's 100% speculation.

Deus Irae said:

He was supposed to avoid a situation where his #2 interior lineman wanted to leave. This isn't rocket science. Here, post this on your wall...

Bad ideas:

1.) Forcing a needed player to restructure his deal to one based upon playing time, and then cutting his playing time for reasons other than level of play.


There have been plenty of other things done this year that you can add to that list, but you can start with that one. Perhaps you can put a note at the bottom that says something like

"Always remember that football players are human beings, with human emotions."

Click to expand...

If they were ignoring human emotions they wouldn't have honored his request to be released.

50-yard-line said:

I don't care why Tommy Kelly's gone. The bottom line is that the Patriots are a much weaker team without him. I've watched the Arizona games and say with all confidence that he would be the BEST DT on that team (unless and until Wilfork continues to come back form his injury - Kelly didn't have an Achilles, but an ACL, which is easier for rehab) by a WIDE MARGIN.

It's really that simple.

Click to expand...

I watch the Cards every week. This part of your statement is definitely correct. If Kelly was still on the Pats, he would be their best DT(if not their best DL). He has played very well. And I wish he was still in NE. Although he got hurt after only a few games last year, I thought he looked real good. I don't know the real reason he left, but he is definitely making less in AZ than he would have in NE. I don't see how that makes the Pats "cheap". I guess it is possible he was ass chapped about being asked to restructure and saw that he was able to still play at a high level in pre-season so he figured it was time to leave. He still didn't make the best short term financial move but sometimes other things are more important than just dollars. Remember, Tommy Kelly made big bank with the Raiders so he shouldn't be hurting in that department. I assume he didn't like being asked to re-structure or how he saw his roll with the team developing in a way he didn't like or something so he asked to leave and the Pats obliged. I wish they had done something to convince him to stay. But they didn't. Nor were they under any obligation to. They could have held on to him but it may have turned out like Adalius Thomas. I don't think he would act that way, but I don't know. I think they showed him respect in granting him his release. How that goes with "Pats are cheap" narrative escapes me.

Froob said:

There's no evidence they even low balled Steve Smith. That's 100% speculation.

Click to expand...

Steve Smith himself has gone on record saying that Belichick called him personally before he went to Baltimore and was very interested in him. One could assume that was Bill making a plea for Smith to change his travel plans.

People also seem to forget Baltimore could give him one thing NE couldn't this season- playing the Panthers.

JMC00 said:

Steve Smith himself has gone on record saying that Belichick called him personally before he went to Baltimore and was very interested in him. One could assume that was Bill making a plea for Smith to change his travel plans.

People also seem to forget Baltimore could give him one thing NE couldn't this season- playing the Panthers.

Click to expand...

Thought I saw somewhere that proximity to family was a big deal for Smith as well, which gave the Ravens a decided advantage. I also recall that Smith had a visit scheduled here but signed a contract before he left Baltimore. I have a hard time faulting BB here.

CHB blames it on arrogance:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...ge-for-week/icOuKxKfmoabDKGyroHW4K/story.html